• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Strictly Come Dancing
Scd Does Not Rasise Money For Charity (Merged)
<<
<
7 of 7
>>
>
DavidJames
27-11-2008
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“I have found it rather presumptive (and sometimes risky) to assume the status quo, especially when previous announcements that most are used to hearing over many years (verbal & on-screen) no longer appear AND the cost of the call has mysteriously nearly halved.”

It depends on your observation powers - and most of us are really not that observant.

I've never voted, so it's never been of interest to me. Before knowing the situation, I did notice the 15p thing, and I did vaguely notice the absence of the CiN advert, but they didn't really register that much with me.

So I think it's understandable that people got confused generally, especially at the start.
PeterWD
27-11-2008
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Or the number of significant things that no longer appear (visually, aurally) should of course do that itself.


Quite. ”

The problem is that once people get an idea fixed in their heads it can be very difficult to dislodge it.

Referring to the BBC Guidelines for phone-ins is OK for people who are comfortable with official legalistic statements. I think a larger number of people are likely to find their eyes glazing over as they attempt to read the guidelines and then they will ask questions like:

1. Why doesn't the BBC fix the phone-voting system so that there are no more scandals?

and

2. Why is the BBC being so mean?

I suspect the answer to Q1 is that it is impossible to make the phone-voting system perfect. Things will go wrong even in a system that is run with complete honesty - technical failures and human errors can happen. The BBC wants to have no responsibility for the phone-voting system - it's a big enough responsibility making sure that the correct phone numbers and then the correct results are given. (Remember 17 March 2007 when Terry Wogan announced the wrong winner of the phone-vote for who would represent the UK in the Eurovision Song Contest. Fearne Cotton had to frantically correct him.)

As for Q2, the BBC is not being deliberately mean.
memmh
27-11-2008
Bumping
DavidJames
27-11-2008
Originally Posted by PeterWD:
“1. Why doesn't the BBC fix the phone-voting system so that there are no more scandals?”

Now that's a very good question - and the answer is, the new guidelines don't fix the problem, they simply remove the whole system. So there's an element of throwing the baby out with the bathwater there.
mossy2103
27-11-2008
Originally Posted by DavidJames:
“Now that's a very good question - and the answer is, the new guidelines don't fix the problem, they simply remove the whole system. So there's an element of throwing the baby out with the bathwater there.”

Maybe they see it as an easier solution bearing in mind that no "fix" is likely to be 100%, and there would be an even bigger outcry if there was any repeat in the future. far easier to issue strict guidelines and remove any grey areas.

However, that discussion would be taking this thread way OT for this (SCD) forum and this thread in particular.
memmh
27-11-2008
Bumping again
memmh
30-11-2008
Bumping
<<
<
7 of 7
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map